The Green Monster is back.
On Feb. 24, the Environment Committee unveiled H.B. 5004, a 58-page climate omnibus bill that threatens to impose costly mandates that will drive up energy bills. But this time, it goes even further — forcing gas customers to fund green projects while handing unelected bureaucrats even more control over the state’s energy future.
The first section of the bill imposes aggressive emissions mandates on state agencies, requiring them to slash greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 45% below 2001 levels by 2030, 70% below 2016 levels by 2040, and reach net zero by 2050.
But it doesn’t stop there. The bill also allows agencies to use the “social cost” of GHG emissions when evaluating projects. This so-called “social cost” is nothing more than a nebulous number that speculates the monetary damages associated with emitting GHG into the atmosphere. State agencies could then use this number to justify costly environmental spending, even if it’s not the best use of taxpayer dollars.
Additionally, another section requires the Department of Administrative Services (DAS) to develop guidelines for remodeling, repairing, and constructing state buildings with a focus on energy efficiency, zero-carbon heating, and renewable energy sources. DAS must also submit a plan and budget to retrofit existing fossil fuel-based heating and cooling systems in state buildings, outlining funding sources and timelines for replacing gas or oil heating with electric alternatives.
This might sound good in theory, but there’s one glaring problem — state employees aren’t even in the office, and they don’t want to be. Connecticut’s executive branch agencies have embraced remote work, with 42% of employees working from home as many as four days a week. State workers and their unions have repeatedly fought against return-to-office mandates, pushing for permanent telework policies instead.
If employees aren’t coming back and their unions are dead set on keeping them home, why spend millions upgrading buildings that sit mostly empty? Instead of forcing taxpayers to fund expensive green renovations, the state should continue its efforts in consolidating office space and reassess whether these buildings are even needed.
The bill also updates the statewide GHG reduction targets — requiring a 65% emissions cut from 2001 levels by 2040 and establishing a net-zero goal by 2050 — while granting broad authority to the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection’s (DEEP) commissioner to impose new regulations to meet these goals.
As long as DEEP follows Chapter 54 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the state’s rulemaking process, it can rewrite regulations with minimal oversight, sidestepping the General Assembly, and leaving key policy decisions in the hands of unelected bureaucrats.
While the state’s Regulation Review Committee must approve these regulations, that’s not the same as requiring a full legislative vote. In other words, unelected climate bureaucrats — not lawmakers — will decide how far these regulations go, potentially leaving Connecticut residents with higher utility costs, new carbon taxes, and stricter efficiency mandates, all without a single vote from their elected representatives.
Meanwhile, other parts of the bill seem to contradict Gov. Ned Lamont’s stance on natural gas.
During his January State of the State address, he cautioned not to “rule out natural gas… that’s where most of our power comes from and will for the foreseeable future, especially without more nuclear power.” Yet, this legislation moves Connecticut toward phasing out natural gas, pushing electrification policies that could make it harder to maintain the reliable and affordable energy mix he acknowledged as necessary.
The bill requires the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority (PURA) to make recommendations to the General Assembly on reducing reliance on natural gas to meet the state’s GHG reduction and zero-carbon electricity targets.
While the bill doesn’t explicitly call for a phase-out, the Connecticut Roundtable on Climate and Jobs, an activist group, described it as a step toward eliminating natural gas, stating in its talking points that the bill includes “recommendations to the General Assembly concerning the phase-out of natural gas.”
Gas companies will also be required to develop incentive programs for thermal energy networks — systems that use underground piping to transfer heating and cooling between multiple buildings as an alternative to individual heating systems.
While the networks will be owned by municipalities or designated entities, gas companies will be responsible for funding incentives to support their development. They will be allowed to recoup their investment through fees on utility bills, regardless of whether those customers directly benefit from the network.
Natural gas heats nearly a third of Connecticut homes, but lawmakers seem to be more interested in forcing people onto electric heat — whether they can afford it or not. PURA’s review won’t just be about studying options; it will be about justifying policies to make natural gas more expensive and less available over time. And once state regulators decide that “beneficial electrification” is the only path forward, gas customers will be left with no choice but to comply.
The Green Monster also expands the state’s energy efficiency mandates by imposing stricter standards on a wide range of household and commercial appliances, including ovens, water heaters, furnaces, air conditioners, and lighting.
DEEP is given discretion over efficiency regulations creating a backdoor for future gas stove bans by allowing the agency to exceed federal requirements. It could impose aggressive emissions limits on gas appliances, making them nearly impossible to sell or install.
Not everything in the Green Monster is a disaster. There are a few provisions that, on their own, might be reasonable. The bill includes some practical ideas like allowing funds from Connecticut’s open space program to be used for wildfire prevention. Clearing dry brush and reducing fire risks could help protect forests and nearby communities from devastating wildfires.
It also calls for a study on expanding solar canopies over parking lots and public spaces, an initiative that could make better use of existing infrastructure without requiring massive new land development.
But a few reasonable ideas tucked into a 58-page climate behemoth don’t change the reality —H.B. 5004 is nothing but a power grab disguised as environmental policy. Connecticut’s energy future is being reshaped not by elected officials but by unelected bureaucrats and activists who see affordability and reliability as secondary concerns.
And they’re not waiting for the debate to play out. On Monday, March 3, activists will flood the Legislative Office Building, dressed in green, for the public hearing on the bill, pressuring lawmakers to push forward with their climate wish list.
The public hearing is supposed to be an opportunity for legislators to weigh the consequences of these policies, but environmental groups have already mobilized, calling on their followers to show up in force to drown out dissent.
If history is any guide, lawmakers will hear hours of carefully orchestrated testimony about why Connecticut must lead the charge on decarbonization — never mind the costs to residents and businesses. What won’t get nearly as much attention is the reality of what this bill means: higher utility rates, less consumer choice, and a regulatory framework that makes it easier to impose costly mandates with little legislative oversight.
For all of Hartford’s posturing about affordability, the Green Monster makes clear where the real priorities lie. The push to eliminate natural gas, hand more power to unelected agencies, and make energy decisions without direct accountability isn’t about what’s best for Connecticut families — it’s about advancing an ideological agenda, no matter the cost.
